©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC) joined Glenn on radio today with a refreshing and much-needed approach: telling the truth, even if it's bad news. Sanford explained the reason behind the Freedom Caucus endorsing the latest version of Obamacare.
Enjoy the complimentary clip or read the transcript for details.
GLENN: So there was a disturbing news out of the White House yesterday. Yesterday, the Senate came and was briefed at the White House on North Korea. Some of the senators walked out and rolled their eyes. And they were quoted as saying, well, that was interesting. And not in a positive way.
No real word on -- on what happened, what the plan is. And couple that with another story that's coming out from the White House on how the president is briefed. And this is coming from an ally of Donald Trump inside the White House. And I have to tell you, Pat, your blood runs cold when you hear how he's briefed?
PAT: Yeah. Oh, yeah.
GLENN: I mean, this is one of the most disturbing things I've read. We'll get into that.
Also, a guy who is turning out to be somebody that we can really seemingly count on to tell the truth and to stand up to the weasels in Washington is congressman Mark Sanford of South Carolina. I don't believe he's ever been on the show before. We welcome him, beginning right now.
(music)
GLENN: Congressman Mark Sanford from South Carolina. How are you, sir?
MARK: I'm good. Good to hear your voice.
GLENN: It's good to have you on. Let me just get this uncomfortable moment out from me. Out into the open.
I saw you quickly in the hallway a few years back. And at the time, I was still kind of mad at you for the stuff that, you know, we all went through and you went through. But I have to tell you, you have -- you have taken a situation that could have just destroyed anybody, and you have -- you have a real success and redemption story. And it's really nice to have you on.
MARK: Well, you're very, very kind.
Without going into it, I have been on a journey that involves both the grace of man and the grace of God.
GLENN: Yeah.
MARK: And it's a pretty good journey.
GLENN: Well, we're glad to have you on.
I want to talk about a couple of things. Because you're a free market Libertarian-minded congressman, which are getting harder and harder to find, at least it seems out here in the wild as we're looking in. You saw the tax plan. And you've heard more now, I'm sure, you know, on the Trumpcare plan. How are you feeling about things?
MARK: You know, I think from a conservative or Libertarian standpoint, a lot of us are concerned about where things go next.
A number of us have sort of stuck our finger in the dike trying to hold back the health care bill based on a belief from a process standpoint. Not being ready for prime time. There's a value to the back and forth that -- that may not be comfortable or fun. But there's a real value to that.
And, frankly, some of the consequent results that would have come with that bill in its original form. And on the tax bill, I think a number of us are concerned about its ramifications with regard to the deficit. I think we need to -- I mean, this is a huge opportunity, the idea of reforming taxes, but we need to do it within the context of not simultaneously blowing up the debt and the deficit, which is no longer talked about in Washington, DC.
GLENN: I think this is so frightening. We don't even have a budget. And in the period we haven't had a budget, we've increased the debt by $10 trillion.
You're right. Nobody is talking about it. And I'm sorry to say that the -- the whole economic principle of cutting taxes only really works when you put it in the context of Calvin Coolidge. You must cut spending first. That's the only thing that's going to give all of us confidence that we can relax and spend a little bit and create jobs.
MARK: You're absolutely right. Because what's really interesting, as we both know, a deficit is simply a delayed tax. You're just stacking the bill. But the idea of saying, we'll cut taxes on one hand. But we'll run bigger deficits on the other. The two wash each other out from an economic standpoint. And so the only-fashioned notion of saying, "Wait a minute. Let's begin with the beginning." It was actually Milton Friedman who once said, "The ultimate measure of government is what it spends." Now, it's not the only measure, but it's a pretty important measure because it's from there that we raise taxes to pay for -- deficits may come as a result between the two.
But what it spends is something that's not looked at in Washington, but I think it's still looked at very closely by folks across this country.
GLENN: Well, I will tell you this, as a small business man, we were talking about this yesterday. And everybody on the team said, "Well, you know, that will increase job creation, et cetera, et cetera." And as the guy who actually pays the bills and runs the business, I said, "Not as much, quite honestly, as you might think because I'm still going to hold an awful lot back from for a rainy day because I know the center won't hold. This is a game." The only ones that are really going to spend it are the ones that I think will take those taxes and pour it into the stock market or whatever they can pour it into, that will have short-term paper guns to make more money, but not to necessarily create more jobs, because they know at some point the music will stop.
MARK: Uh-huh.
We're in the fourth longest economic recovery in the history of our nation right now. And if you believe in, I guess what the statisticians call regression to the mean or what everyday folks call the law of averages, to your point, it won't go on forever. I think, again, it could be very helpful in terms of competitiveness of this country.
GLENN: Yeah.
MARK: I think it's an incredible opportunity. These opportunities don't roll around often.
And this is the fourth time in the history of our republic that Republicans have held the House, Senate, and White House. But I think we need to do it within the context of making sure we're watching on the spending front. And our budgets become more and more unrealistic as each year goes by. And they get harder and harder to -- to, in essence, bring to ballot over a 10-year time frame.
And it's important that, again, we do talk at some level about this old-fashioned notion of accumulating debt and deficit.
It is amazing right now -- it's almost like the three monkeys about hear no evil, I speak no evil, I think no evil, with regard to debt and deficit. It is something that is just not focused on in DC right now, but I think has real implications in terms of value of the dollar, in terms of future inflation, and ultimately our way of life.
GLENN: So let me ask you a couple of things on, the Freedom Caucus stood against -- and you stood against Obamacare. I'm sorry. Obamacare and Trumpcare.
MARK: Yeah.
GLENN: When Trumpcare was being pushed, you were actually threatened by Team Trump. They said that, if you didn't sign up, they would challenge you in the primary of 2018. And from what I understand, you said, "Go ahead." Now they're saying that the Freedom Caucus is starting to come on board. Is there something that we can actually look at, that is possibly decent?
MARK: Yeah. It's represented in this MacArthur Amendment whether or not that will ultimately get us up and over the top, I'm not sure. But I think that the Freedom Caucus -- well, I know the Freedom Caucus has come on board based on the belief of, one, let's tell the truth to the American public. The truth is we're not repealing the Affordable Care Act. Even though there had been a lot of fanfare when we had a Democratic president and it couldn't go into effect, you know, 60 votes to that effect in the House of Representatives, the bill that made its way all the way to the president, a lot of chest-beating saying, "We've got to repeal. We've got to repeal. We've got to repeal." When push comes to shove, now that we have the chance, they were not willing -- the conference was not willing to bring that bill forward.
And I think that the allies that I deal with in the Freedom Caucus pushed awfully hard on that, saying, wait. This is something that is clear consensus in the House, the Senate. We've done it multiple times. But for whatever reason, that isn't where we were. This other bill moved forward. It wasn't, as I say, ready for prime time. It had a number of different deficiencies that I think would have hurt people who rely on the individual marketplace for their insurance.
And in essence, this MacArthur Amendment was an experiment in federalism. Getting it was called title one. And title one is really the central nervous system of what drives up cost in the individual marketplace and what, frankly, drives the Affordable Care Act. And our fight in --
GLENN: What is title one?
MARK: Title one basically deals with insurance being insurance. So if I said to you, we're going to -- you know, I'm going to give you great insurance. You know, great insurance. You have a 200,000-dollar house. But you've got to buy a million and a half dollar policy. You would say, that ain't great insurance for me. It might be great insurance, but it's not great insurance for me. Great insurance is the insurance that fits for me and for my family and those that I love.
And so what title one gets at is, all the different provisions that prevented insurance from being insurance. Insurance is not being able to buy your homeowner's policy when the house is on fire. You have to buy your homeowner's policy ahead of time to be covered.
And what the Affordable Care Act did is it said, you could wait until your house was on fire to buy a homeowner's policy. So title one was, again, letting -- preventing insurance from being insurance. And it was our belief that if you were ever going to, again, affect the cost of insurance for that small business person out there struggling to make it and struggling with fewer choices and rising premiums, you had to let insurance be insurance.
And so that's what the fight has been about. And what this MacArthur Amendment did was it said, okay. We'll split the baby. And we'll do a federalism experiment. States that want to let insurance be insurance, they can do that. States that don't, won't. If Vermont wants to go to a single-payer system, they may. If South Carolina wants to go to a more market-based system, they may. And that I think is the most you'll be able to get out of the conference. And at that point, the Freedom Caucus folded the cards and said, I guess, as of yesterday to be exact, we'll sign off on that particular measure. And that's where things are right now.
GLENN: Mark -- we're talking to Congressman Mark Sanford from South Carolina who is showing some real spine and some backbone and standing up for some real true conservative principles. I'd love to talk to you about the future of the party and where you think this is going and the -- and where Trump is going. But one of the pressing issues that I think we need to talk about is North Korea.
What is the temperature in Washington for North Korea? We, for the life of us, cannot come up with a way that this ends without at least a million dead.
MARK: Yeah. You can draw some really bad doomsday scenarios. There was actually a closed door Intel briefing yesterday afternoon on the Hill for members of Congress on this particular topic. And without going into that, I would just say that -- I -- I think we want to be careful about rattling this particular saber --
GLENN: No, I know.
MARK: At this point, North Korea does not have the capacity to bring harm to domestic US. And I think we need to put things within that particular framework as we look at and access threat.
GLENN: Do you believe this administration is looking at it like that?
MARK: I -- I think that they are most worried about what might happen there. And I think that they're thinking about preemptive -- preemptive steps to prevent something from happening.
GLENN: That doesn't sound good.
What is -- with everything, Mark, that is going on, the economy -- I have a woman on who was inside the Dallas fed. She wrote a great book. I don't know if you've seen it, called Fed Up. She was in Wall Street. And then she was one of the chief researchers for the head of the Dallas fed here in -- and saw, you know, 2008 coming a mile away. And she was laughed at until it happened. And then she was promoted.
And what she sees coming now is an absolute disaster financially. With that -- with the world on the edge, with -- with Russia and with a press that is no longer trusted, a government that is no longer trusted, what -- what keeps you up at night? And what keeps you optimistic?
MARK: What keeps me up at night is exactly -- I will make it a point to find this book Fed Up. It's fascinating.
But, you know, I would just presuppose that her philosophical alignment is to the right.
GLENN: Yes.
MARK: But whether you're right or left on this issue -- I mean, it was interesting that Erskine Bowles, who was, you know, Clinton's former chief of staff at the time of the Bowles/Simpson commission, remarked that, you know, look, we're looking at the most predictable financial crisis in the history of man.
If you think about Admiral Mike Mullen, former chairman and joint of chief, his observation was -- when asked, what's the biggest threat to the United States? Not the Chinese. Excuse me -- not the Chinese, not the Taliban. But his answer was the American debt.
And so whether it's somebody who is a firsthand participant in the way that the fed works, with the right position, somebody from a military position, somebody from the left, the thing that we're not talking about right now is indeed the build-up of the debt. There's an interesting book if you have insomnia called At This Time, It's Different.
GLENN: Oh, yeah.
MARK: And it was written by a professor from Harvard and a professor from Maryland, writer, and wrote often. Some of their methodologies have been questioned. But their largest premise is accurate. And they look at the last 800 years of financial history, as it relates to governments, and what they found is that in every instance, civilization has got to a tipping point where -- and they had to decide, do we go back to what made us competitive and perhaps a world power in the first place, or do we stay on this happy, but ultimately unsustainable cycle of upward government spending and consumption? And nine times out of ten, they chose the easy path. They said, well, this time it's different. Of course, it never was. Gravity always works. And it was the seeds of that civilization's undoing.
And so the thing that keeps me up at night is the way in which there's not a focus on the implications of the debt and the deficit for every working American.
GLENN: So I will tell you, I am working on a book based on history, on that very thing.
MARK: Hmm.
GLENN: And I will tell you that -- I found it very hard to stay optimistic once you know history. But I have found what keeps me -- helps me back to sleep at night, what have you found that puts you back to sleep at night?
MARK: Engagement. You know, I think that people aren't dumb. At times in politics, we can fuse -- and I think even the president -- I say this most respectfully confuses -- they think it's about us. It's not about us. We're simply receptacles for people's ideas and ideals and the advancement of those ideas. And I would say that this election back in November was less about Donald Trump than it was about people's absolute mind-numbing frustration with the way that Washington was working for them.
GLENN: Yes.
MARK: And so if we just simply separate ourselves just a touch -- it's not about me. It's about these ideas that people are ginned up on.
GLENN: Yeah.
MARK: What I will say is that we all ought -- right now, you walk into a restaurant, many times it used to be the sports channel that was up.
GLENN: Yeah.
MARK: Nowadays it's a news channel because people are focused on politics. And I think to that degree, engagement is exciting.
GLENN: Yeah. Congressman Mark Sanford from South Carolina. Thank you very much. And, by the way, thank you for holding out for Nikki Haley. If we wouldn't have had you, we wouldn't have had her. She's doing a great job in the UN. But thank you for everything. We'll talk again soon.
MARK: Looking forward to it.
GLENN: Congressman Mark Sanford.
Glenn Beck recently witnessed a SpaceX rocket launch from hours away, and the raw power of it sent him into a passionate breakdown about the wonder of space travel, the brilliance of Elon Musk, and the insanity of a culture that’s turning on its greatest innovators. From the days of the Space Shuttle to Musk’s Starship and self-driving Tesla vehicles, Glenn argues that Elon isn’t just a tech founder, but rather a once-in-history mind, a modern Edison who revived an American spirit we had forgotten.
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: Last night, here in Florida, Tania said SpaceX is going to launch another missile. About 15 minutes. Let's go outside and see if we can see it. And we live right on the coast. And all of a sudden, you know, we're watching it, ten, nine, eight, seven, six. And about 45 seconds after the launch. We're like, oh, but we can't see it. Then all of a sudden, over the top of the trees, we just see this flame coming up. And it was absolutely. I posted it on the Instagram last night. On my Instagram page. It was absolutely one of the most amazing things I've seen.
From a distance. I've seen it once before. I've seen the last space shuttle lift off in the middle of the night. And I really close. I was across the water. I was just right across from -- what is it?
Cape Kennedy.
And I could not believe, it was a wonder of the world. 3 o'clock in the morning. All of a sudden, it was just day light.
And now, I'm -- oh, I don't even know.
Three hours away. Two, three hours away?
And it's one of the most incredible things I've ever seen.
It just starts coming up. And then, you know, you see the rocket. The boosters detach.
The -- the first stage rockets go out. They turn blue. Then they go out.
And then you see them. And it just picks up so much speed. And just racing through the sky.
It is incredible. It's incredible.
If you've never seen a rocket launch, I can't wait to see his -- what is the -- that was a falcon.
What's the big, big heavy one that he's working on.
Nobody knows.
VOICE: Falcon Heavy, isn't it?
VOICE: Is it the Falcon Heavy?
I don't know.
I don't think so.
I think -- somebody look this up.
Starship. That's it.
I think it's based on the original Soviet design. The Soviets, the reason why we beat the Soviets up in space, is they had this great design of like 24 rockets.
Where we had like four, big, huge ones for lift.
They had like 24, 25 rockets, at the bottom of it.
But they couldn't synchronize them.
You know, this was when computing was really, really bad.
They couldn't synchronize them.
So they couldn't keep it level.
So it would take off. And spiral out of control and blow up.
That's the reason why we beat them into space.
I saw the bottom end of one of these rockets in a video. And I think -- I think it's the original Soviet design. I'm not sure. Because now we have the ability to synchronize everything. But I can't wait to see that thing. Because it's bigger than a Saturn rocket. Bigger the ones that we send to the moon.
JASON: At some point, I don't know if the wonder of space travel left.
JASON: We get bored with things.
JASON: It's so weird. But Elon Musk just brought it back. I mean, we're doing just amazing stuff.
GLENN: It's like everything.
We did it. We mastered it. We put people on the moon. Everybody was crazed about it. I remember sitting in class and seeing the astronauts, you know, on the moon. We would go in. They would bring in an old TV.
And they would sit the TV. Before these things were even on the little -- you know, wheel, you know, AV kind of things.
It was just a big old TV.
And we all went into the regular -- you know, the gym, and we watched it on a regular TV.
And them walking around, on the moon. And that must have been in the early '70s.
And then after that, everybody was like, yeah. So we've been to the moon. Now, nobody believes we've gone to the moon ever.
Now we're going back up. And, I mean, it's amazing. It's amazing to watch. Because you just think, I just watched it last night. I'm like, my gosh. Look at the power of that thing.
I could -- how far are we away?
Three hours?
Two hours?
You could hear it. You could hear it. It got to a certain place. Where my wife said, you can see it on the tape on Instagram. My wife at one point said, can you hear that?
You could! You could hear the crackle of it. It is -- I mean, it's incredible. Just incredible.
I really want to go see a liftoff in person, again. Just amazing.
STU: Yeah. We should. To be clear, we should excommunicate him out of our society. Because you wore a red hat a few times. That, I think is a smart -- it's a smart move.
GLENN: I know. What a dummy.
STU: Yeah. He's an idiot. And obviously, we don't need him helping our country, right now.
Why?
Because he voted for lower taxes or something.
We -- that's a good way to run our society.
GLENN: Hate that guy. Hate that guy.
STU: Amazing.
GLENN: What a dope.
We have just -- we have just become morons.
STU: Hmm.
GLENN: We really -- really have.
History will look back and go, at what point, they just became morons. You know.
STU: Do you find it interesting, Glenn. He was at this turn with the Saudi Arabian, you know, delegation, I guess.
Trump did a turn and invited a bunch of VIPs to it.
I thought a good sign from the perspective of the relationship between Trump and Elon Musk, that he was invited in, was there.
Right?
Remember, they had a total falling out. It was over the Epstein files. If you --
GLENN: No. They made nice at Charlie Kirk's funeral.
STU: Yeah. So that's what you think earlier repaired. Somewhat repaired at this point?
GLENN: Yeah. Somewhat repaired. And, you know, if you're trying to showcase the best of America. Who better to have at the table than Elon Musk?
I mean, he is the Tesla or the Edison of our day. There's nobody -- is there anybody in the world that everybody, with an exception of those who are just so politically, you know -- I don't know.
Pilled. That they just can't stand anybody that votes differently than them.
I mean, be even when he was -- we thought he was a real big lefty.
I still wanted to meet the guy.
I still wanted to be, man, I would give my right arm to sit and listen to that guy in the same room.
You know what I mean?
It would be great.
This is a guy who will be remembered for hundreds of years.
After Jesus comes.
Well, we may not have history books at that point.
But he's going to be remembered for hundreds of years, as one of the greatest human beings ever. When they were still human beings.
So, I mean, who doesn't want to meet that guy?
How is it that we have half of our -- we have half of our country now just hating on that guy?
It's genius. Would you be happier if he was Chinese.
STU: Thank God, he's here.
GLENN: Thank God.
STU: And wants to be here.
And wants to be in this environment.
I think that, you know, you look at everything.
And it's going to be a great biopic.
The movie on Elon Musk's life. Is going to be absolutely incredible. Because he is a somewhat complicated figure at times.
There's a lot to discuss on the Elon Musk front.
GLENN: Oh.
STU: Just think of the fact that this guy has put, I don't know.
You know, hundreds of thousands. Millions of cars on the road right now.
That are, you know, capable and are driving themselves.
Think of -- that's like -- an incredible accomplishment!
This is a guy who is putting cars that are -- you know, have full self-driving. You can sit in there.
The thing will drive itself from point A to point B. Without you touching really anything.
And that is -- think about the fact that that's just being said. That even people are allowed. You know, that governments are just like. Yeah. We trust this guy. To let all these cars drive themselves.
It's an amazing accomplishment. That's just one of many.
It's really an amazing life.
“I feel like I’ve been fired by America,” says Cracker Barrel CEO Julie Masino, in a vulnerable tell-all that goes behind the scenes into the explosive Cracker Barrel rebrand which Glenn describes as “stupid from start to finish.” In August 2025, Cracker Barrel unveiled a minimal new logo with modern fonts, cozy colors....no nice old man....and no BARREL for him to lean on. But it wasn’t just the logo; the restaurant chain was also getting a “modern” remodel. In short: We hated it. Social media erupted with brutal reviews, calling it “minimalist,” “soulless” and “downright ugly.” Cracker Barrel stock tanked, their attempt to tamp down the pushback backfired, and it looked like this was their “Bud Light moment.” But then, Cracker Barrel surprised us. They listened. Within weeks, they scrapped the new logo, reinstated the original, and hit pause on every remodel. “Covid even made Cracker Barrel start drinking,” says Doug Hisel, Senior Vice President of Store operations, as he takes Glenn behind the scenes as to what REALLY led to moment that brought Cracker Barrel to its knees. In Julie’s first interview since her time on “Good Morning America” when she said the response to the new logo, “was overwhelmingly positive,” she is here to say to America: “I’m sorry....I regret it.” Now the question is: will America forgive her?
Democrat Rep. Jasmine Crockett recently claimed on the House floor that Republicans, including EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, had taken money from “somebody named Jeffrey Epstein.” But it wasn’t THE Jeffrey Epstein. Glenn and Stu review this incredibly dumb attempt to smear Republicans and the even more insane excuses she gave to CNN.
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
GLENN: Let's start with Jasmine Crockett. Yesterday, she came out, and she said that Lee Zeldin was receiving money from Jeffrey Epstein!
And Lee Zeldin is like, what?
No, I didn't!
Now, he knows that he did get money from Jeffrey Epstein. Just not the Jeffrey Epstein. Another Jeffrey Epstein.
Here is -- here is Jasmine Crockett trying to spin her mistake, on CNN last night.
Listen to this.
VOICE: Senate Democrat, who has been on defense over Jeffrey Epstein is Stacey Plaskett. She represents the Virgin Islands. She was texting with Jeffrey Epstein the day of Michael Cohen's hearing. Her questions pretty closely followed the text messages between the two of them to ask about Rhona Graff, Trump's long-time assistant. You were defending her today and in recent days, yesterday. And you talked about Republicans taking money from a Jeffrey Epstein. Here's what you said.
VOICE: Who also took money from somebody named Jeffrey Epstein, as I had my team dig in very quickly. Mitt Romney, the NRCC. Lee Zeldin. George Bush. When (inaudible). McCain/Palin. Rick Lazio.
VOICE: You mentioned Lee Zeldin there. He's now a cabinet secretary. He responded and said, it was actually Dr. Jeffrey Epstein, who is a doctor that doesn't have any relation to the convicted sex trafficker. Unfortunate for that doctor. But that is who donated to a prior campaign of his.
And do you want to correct the record on --
VOICE: I never said that it was that Jeffrey Epstein. Just so the people understand when you make a donation, your future is not there. And because they decided to spring this on us, in real time. I wanted the Republicans to think about what could potentially happen.
Because I knew that they didn't even try to go through FEC. So my team, what they did was they Googled. And that is specifically why I said agent, because unlike Republicans, I at least don't go out and just tell lies.
Because it was -- when Lee Zeldin had something to say, all he had to say was it was a different Jeffrey Epstein. He knew he did receive donations from a Jeffrey Epstein. So at least I wasn't trying to mislead people. To find out who this doctor was --
GLENN: Can we stop for a second. There's so much to digest.
We have to stop for just a second.
You weren't misleading people. Because you didn't see it was the Jeffrey Epstein.
You said it was a Jeffrey Epstein. What is the problem with getting money from Jeffrey Epstein?
There's no problem. That would be like, and Stu Burguiere has been taking money from Bob Stevenson. And?
What's the problem?
He's been working for Bob Stevenson for years. He was delivering papers as a kid to Bob Stevenson's front door! Who is Bob Stevenson?
There's not a problem with that. Why would you go out and say -- if she had come out and said, you know what, Lee Zeldin was also taking money from Bob Stevenson and Jim Furstenbergersteinberg.
I mean, then it would be fine.
You clearly were smearing. Not misleading? Not misleading?
STU: Oh. I --
GLENN: What's the problem from taking it from -- other than poor Dr. Jeffrey Epstein. Oh, my gosh.
STU: First of all.
GLENN: I feel bad for that guy.
STU: That life sucks.
If you're Dr. Jeffrey Epstein, you got to think about a name-change.
But there's hundreds of Dr. -- not doctor, but hundreds of Jeffrey Epsteins across the country.
GLENN: Hundreds.
STU: And I -- I mean, she was designed in a lab to make me happy. Jasmine Crockett.
I -- I love her so much.
GLENN: True. I do too. I do too.
STU: If you could formulate the perfect Democrat. I think I would just have to put her out there.
She just says the dumbest.
Like, she can't even get her bad defense right over this.
Like, she's trying to say, well, I didn't lie. Like, that's your defense in theory. I threw this in here. I noticed it, at the time. We talked about it, I think yesterday.
That she said -- yeah. She did.
She knew -- which actually makes it worse. She knew she was lying. She knew there was a good chance this wasn't Jeffrey Epstein.
But the last thing in the world --
GLENN: It's not a problem if you would have said -- it wouldn't be a problem if you would say, look!
All of these people have taken money from a Jeffrey Epstein.
Doubt that it's the same Jeffrey Epstein. Might be.
Might not be.
STU: I mean -- what value would be that?
GLENN: I know. I know.
It would be no value. But at least you can say, I'm not trying to mislead people.
STU: Right.
GLENN: I am trying to create doubt in people's minds.
But I'm not saying he's taking money from Jeffrey Epstein.
You know, when she just lists all of these people.
I mean, let's look at her donation. Let's see if she's ever taken money from a Charlie Manson.
(laughter)
You know what I mean? She's taken money from a John Wayne Gacy.
Hello!
A Ted Bundy has been seen around her house.
I mean, it's crazy! It's crazy!
And she knew exactly what she was doing.
And I hope that she continues. I hope that she continues to gain power.
STU: Yes!
GLENN: And love and respect from the Democrats. Because she is insane.
She's insane? She's so reckless. She's insane.
STU: She is. And, by the way, this is the person that we are told that should be the face of the party, that they should lean into the way she talks.
Because she's such a good communicator.
And she gets on all these shows, Glenn. This is a massive problem in our politics. And it affects the left more than the right.
It affects both sides to some degree. We're incentivized. The entire system is set up to reward people like her.
Who just say the dumbest things possible. And the most irresponsible and reckless things possible. And get all the clicks.
This woman has been on Colbert. Why?
She has been a complete nobody who is wrong all the time. She's getting on all these massive shows. She's getting booked everywhere. She's living the ultimate life of today's modern congressman.
And what is going to stop her?
The incentives are right there for her to continue.
GLENN: Do you think she doesn't know that she's dead.
Because didn't a Crockett die at the Alamo. Is that her?
I think that's her.
I know a Crockett died at the Alamo.
I'm not really sure. I'm not really sure.
I mean, just, what a dope.
JASON: Can I just point out? It's like, I'm a part of her research team, because she put her team on this.
GLENN: But quickly. But quickly.
JASON: Yeah. I always thought, especially Congress research would have these amazing tools.
GLENN: No, they don't.
JASON: And we, like -- our team struggles over this. We're constantly trying to stay ahead of the curve.
GLENN: And the last thing we do is Google. Google.
JASON: Google searches. That's what you do in Congress.
GLENN: Yes. Yes. That is what you do. That is what you do.
STU: Don't you have to fire your whole team after this.
GLENN: I would. I would. No. But she -- I don't think.
I have a feeling that her team briefed her.
It's why she did say, A, Jeffrey Epstein.
They briefed her, and said, this is probably not the same guy.
It might have even said, if you're Googling, it might have said, Dr. Jeffrey Epstein.
Why wouldn't it?
If that's who gave that money, it most likely said, Dr. Jeffrey Epstein.
And so they would say, it's not the Jeffrey Epstein. Yes, but that's okay.
I mean, she clearly knew. So who is she going to fire? This is what she wanted. Just the smear.
STU: Do we have time to play the rest of this clip? Because there's more to this. It's amazing.
GLENN: Yeah. Go ahead.
VOICE: So I will trust and take what he says. Is that it wasn't that Jeffrey Epstein. But I wasn't attempting to mislead anybody. I literally had maybe 20 minutes before I had to do that debate.
STU: So good.
GLENN: Okay. Stop. Stop. Stop.
So you don't say it!
I literally had 20 minutes. So I -- I didn't know, that the sky wasn't on fire, that that was actually the sun.
I only had 20 minutes before I said, my God, the whole sky is on fire!
STU: This is why I love her.
GLENN: What were you thinking?
STU: She had no idea whether the accusations she was making was true.
And she didn't even consider not saying it. The only thing that she could come up with in her brain, whatever information that comes in, in this rushed time period, just go with it.
And it's like --
GLENN: Do you know why?
STU: Why?
GLENN: Do you know why?
And I don't know if she's smart enough to know this. But you can say whatever you want as a congressman on the floor of Congress, and you cannot be held liable.
STU: That's true.
GLENN: You could say the worst thing. You could say, he was having sex with 4-year-old with his Jeffrey Epstein.
And it could be a complete lie. And you could not be held responsible because you said it, on the floor of the house.
That's why the standards are so low.
The standards are absolutely so low for these Congress -- she could say whatever she wants. If she would have said, not on the floor of the house. Lee Zeldin would sue her.
You could say, you knew what were you doing. You were smearing me and my reputation, intentionally. You knew exactly what you were doing so you couldn't sue.
She could have said, and he was having sex with a 4-year-old.
As long as he said it on the floor of the House, not a problem.
STU: This is the --
GLENN: Yeah. That is how bad our Congress is out of control.
They've you written all these laws for themselves to protect them. So they can be completely irresponsible, and it's fine.
STU: Yeah. I mean, I don't know if it's that, or if she's just a dunce.
It's hard to know with her.
GLENN: She's just dishonest. She's just dishonest.
STU: Yeah. She's dishonest and bad at it. And that's one of the things that I love about it.
There's no wool being pulled over anyone's eyes. It's just pathetic.
GLENN: No. No.
Is there more to this?
Play the rest of it out.
VOICE: Make it sound like he took money --
VOICE: I did not know. I just heard registered sex offender.
VOICE: I literally did not know.
When you search FEC files, and that's what I had my team to do. I texted my team and said, listen. We're going up. They're saying the sheets --
VOICE: Similar to saying, well, your team should have done the homework to make sure it wasn't the convicted sex trafficker.
VOICE: Within 20 minutes, you couldn't find that out. The search on FEC. So number one, I made sure that I was clear, that it was a Jeffrey Epstein.
But I never said it was specifically that Jeffrey Epstein. Because I knew that we would need more time to dig in.
VOICE: Well, Stacey Plaskett was texting the Jeffrey Epstein, talking about -- you voted against the censure for her, to remove her from her committees. You know, we pressed the -- the minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries on this last night.
Maybe you don't think she should be removed from her committees. Why do so many Democrats seem unwilling to say, it's inappropriate to be texting with a registered sex offender about what you're going to ask a witness at a Congressional hearing?
VOICE: So I'm not going to say that was necessarily the case. Now, this was someone who was a former prosecutor. Now, I haven't sat down and talked about all the specifics of why Stacey was doing what she was doing.
I know that when she got up, and she spoke. She talked about the fact that this is one of her constituents. At the end of the day, what I know with prosectors, is that they are typically talking to codefendants. They're typically talking to the people who had the best information.
What you had was the former attorney for the president that was sitting there. And honestly, we knew. Or she knew or at least Jeffrey Epstein presented that he was very cozy with the president.
He had more information, registered sex offend or not. The bigger question is why is it that the president was so cozy with a sex offender. Even if he after ultimately ended up with some of his convictions.
And seemingly he absolutely was on the plane with him. We know about the birthday card. The bigger question is why is the president of the United States not the one in the hot seat for his relationship instead of us saying, oh, you know what, we're going to take her off of her committee.
Because he decided to text her.
GLENN: Stop. Stop.
I can't take this. I can't.
STU: Literally, none of the stuff she said was true.
GLENN: None of it is true. And she's presenting it as absolute fact.
CNN is presenting it as absolute fact. And the latest is the smear last week on the Epstein stuff.
It shows that Epstein that the reason he was going to jail or going through all of the problem is because Donald Trump was the whistle-blower!
I mean, it's -- it's incredible, what they can get away with.
It's absolutely incredible.
STU: All of those happened before this conviction happened. I don't know that she doesn't know that happened. It's so fascinating to watch CNN's response to that.
GLENN: Which is nothing.
STU: How many times they said, Donald Trump said this without evidence.
Where is that on the Jasmine Crockett allegations here?
GLENN: Right.
STU: How about the situation with Caitlin Collins, who at least -- I would say at least kind of asks questions here.
But she can't even take responsibility for them. She's like, oh, well, some people are saying, you shouldn't blurt out obvious lies in the middle of a House session.
Like, what do you mean some people are saying? You never say that when it's the president of the United States.
Reporter Olivia Nuzzi’s career is one of the strangest success stories in modern journalism. From volunteering on Anthony Weiner’s collapsing mayoral campaign to becoming a 24-year-old Washington correspondent with jobs created specifically for her... Nuzzi's rise through the media ranks defies every norm of the industry. Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere explore how an unknown college student was elevated into a media celebrity overnight, why institutions continued to protect her even after major ethical scandals, and what her story reveals about how power truly works inside the press. Is this talent, luck, or something far more engineered?
Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors
STU: Yes. And I will begin the story at the very, very start, Glenn. And I will start it with a question for you.
And this is a question that I think sets the scene for the entire journey we're about to go on.
GLENN: Okay.
STU: Journalist.
GLENN: Let me get my boots on.
STU: Let's do it. She starts her career, very first job, she volunteers as an intern for what campaign? Volunteers as an intern for what campaign?
GLENN: Just -- it just has to be Bill Clinton. Has to be.
STU: It's a good guess. However, timing wise --
GLENN: Oh, Anthony Wiener.
STU: Anthony Wiener is the answer.
GLENN: Yes. Yes! Yes!
STU: She volunteers for the failed mayoral campaign.
GLENN: Fascinating. Fascinating.
STU: Of Anthony Wiener. So this is how this story starts.
GLENN: Oh, Anthony Wiener. So she starts covering Wieners.
STU: Yes. She starts covering Wieners. And the whole story is her doing more of that. We'll get into that as we go.
GLENN: All right.
STU: She starts with the Wiener campaign. It's a disaster. It's kind of a legendary catastrophe. They have a documentary about to go. We talked about that at the time. You know, totally the whole thing flames apart.
GLENN: By the way. By the way. I'm just sitting here thinking, I don't think I was technically wrong when I said it was a Clinton campaign.
Because remember, Hillary Clinton is all over the Wiener.
STU: But that's -- please, don't say it like that.
But, yes. That is accurate.
GLENN: Yeah. Because if I say it like that. It leads you to believe. And that is absolutely not true.
I don't think she's ever --
(laughter)
STU: I think, yes. Because if you remember Huma Abedin, at this time is married to Anthony Wiener.
GLENN: Can you use air quotes? Air quotes on that?
STU: Yes. On her wonderful path to marry a Soros. She's at that time, married to Wiener. And she is helping out Hillary Clinton as her top dog main assistant.
GLENN: Yeah.
STU: That's ongoing. That's the first thing. Almost has nothing to do with the story.
GLENN: Did you use air quotes for the word assistant there, as well.
STU: I did not. So how does Olivia Nuzzi get into our lives? She goes to -- she goes from the Wiener campaign and leaves, and writes basically a tell-all, you know, scandal log of what was going on during the Wiener campaign. Basically, this thing was a catastrophe. She tells the inside story. And releases it to the Daily News. Who prints this column, from at this point a 20-year-old aspiring journalist. And, you know, she's pretty. She's glamorous. She's kind of like the New York elite journalist that you would exactly picture in this situation.
So she gets this, and turns that one column into a job, while she's still in college. She's at Fordham. She's still at college.
GLENN: Oh, she's in Fordham.
STU: Fordham, of course. I thought you would like that detail.
GLENN: Yeah, sorry.
STU: For multiple reasons.
GLENN: My daughter went to Fordham. They actually -- they actually had the balls to -- they held rallies against me on the Fordham campus, and then they had the balls to come and ask my wife and I to come in to meet with the dean, because they wanted to know if we would help them build a library.
STU: No.
GLENN: There were words that started with F that were not fruit!
STU: Yeah.
GLENN: As we left that meeting.
STU: Was it Fordham? Was the F-word Fordham? You Fordham!
GLENN: No. Fordham you!
STU: Yeah. That's the university.
GLENN: That's what I mean. Fordham University. Fordham you! Anyway, go ahead.
STU: Okay. So she gets hired from one that column, as one of the main presidential campaign correspondence for the Daily Beast, which tells you yet again, something about the standards of the Daily Beast when it comes to journalism, which are exactly zero. They have higher standards at Fordham.
(laughter)
GLENN: And those are pretty low.
STU: Those are low.
She is going to cover the Chris Christie campaign. The Rand Paul campaign. And some of the early bubbling beginnings of the Donald Trump campaign. This is back in 2014, '15, and there. She -- in 2015, as you note, as she's in this job. She does that tweet about House of Cards. And how women should not -- or Hollywood should not misportray the journalists that are females. Because they're always saying that they sleep with their sources. And that's a terrible thing -- point that out.
Which is an amazing thing for multiple reasons, Glenn. Because, well, I'll get into that here in a second.
GLENN: Yeah. Okay.
STU: So she see that. She then gets named by Politico one of the 16 breakout media stars of the presidential election. This is November 2016.
GLENN: Wow.
STU: She then in February 2017 parlays that into a job, as the Washington correspondent of New York magazine.
She's 24 years old. Twenty-four years old, Washington correspondent, at New York magazine. You're saying, wow. That's a prestigious position. Who held it before her?
No one. They literally create this job for her, which is incredible. Again, she's 24 years old.
GLENN: Again, it's probably not the only position created for her.
STU: She may have several that she's documented in -- in a book or two, that we could go over later. Okay. So -- and you wonder. And this is a time to pause.
GLENN: Jesus would not be doing this segment, I just want to let you know, right here and now.
STU: Right. That's true. That's true.
GLENN: Go ahead.
STU: You think about what a meteoric rise this is.
Glenn, you know this. This is not how media operates. You don't do what she's done here.
Like, incredible. It's like, she -- someone who never played basketball before, and is in the NBA three years later. It's legitimately an incredible rise. You wonder how that rise occurred. Those questions may be answered later on.
GLENN: Stop using the word "rise." You're making me uncomfortable.
(laughter)
STU: 2018, she's included in the Forbes 30 under 30 list.
GLENN: Uh-huh.
STU: Which is a very prestigious list. October 2018, as a member of -- working for the New York magazine. She's invited for an exclusive interview in the Oval Office to interview Donald Trump. Again, she's 25 at this point.
Very prestigious. She's awarded a next award by the American Society of Magazine editors. She gets a documentary on MSNBC. She portrays herself on the show time show Billions. In 2022.
GLENN: Oh, my gosh.
STU: Again, this is someone who is a massive celebrity in that world. You may not know her name. But she is a massive celebrity.
GLENN: Okay.
STU: She gets a six-part interview from Bloomberg. And then she does a profile of RFK Jr, the candidate who you may remember running for president as a Democrat.
Okay. I can't remember if the profile happened when he was running as a Democrat, or he had kind of flipped to an independent. But it's before he's endorsing Trump, or there's MAHA or any of that stuff. Right? It's in that period.
GLENN: Sure. Sure. Sure.
STU: And she does this profile of him that I guess goes pretty well. And it comes out much more favorable, I would say than many of the other previews. Profiles of RFK Jr in this period.
But, again, has some criticism. And some quirkiness in it. And her style of writing has all sorts of weird details. You know, sometimes it's kind of -- I think it's actually pretty good. I think her reporting was regulated. She did have some really fascinating stories that she wrote over this period.
But like, the celebrities seemed to overextend past maybe what she had achieved in her career so far. So she writes this profile of RFK Jr.
And then it is -- the news breaks that RFK Jr and Olivia Nuzzi are having what they call an emotional affair, which seems to be lots of very detailed loving text messages back and forth. Promises about --
GLENN: When you say loving. Is it like, you know, you are a child of God. And I just love you and want to help you in any way. Is that what you mean by loving? Or do you know do you mean like Barry White loving?
STU: Well, to put it in another word, we're talking about a Kennedy. So I'm talking about Kennedy style loving.
GLENN: Okay. Ding-dong, pizza delivery.
STU: It's important to note that Olivia Nuzzi is engaged to another journalist, Ryan Lizza at this time. And so she's engaged to somebody. RFK Jr.
Not that this makes seemingly any difference to him whatsoever, is married at the time, and is still currently married to an actress in Hollywood. So he's doing this. She's doing this.
This is suboptimal not only for a marriage, but also a presidential campaign. This goes on, the news finally breaks this is happening. This is a problem for a bunch of reasons. Number one, you're -- you have a fiancé. Number two, the person you're texting with is married.
Number three, though, a really serious journalist problem, right?
Like, you're profiling someone and having an affair with them at the same time. That's frowned upon, at least in theory, in the world of journalism.
Now, in practice, God only knows. But in theory, you're not supposed to do that, Glenn. This is something they tell you relatively early on in journalism school, I assume.
And so he --
GLENN: I've got to apologize to all those people that I've been sleeping with that I've been on the show.
STU: How many people have you profiled, Glenn? You just profiled the Great Mufti. Have you ever had any relations --
GLENN: Yeah, have you ever had the relations with the Mufti? I've got to tell you the truth, Stu. Yep. Yep. Back in 1942.
STU: Oh, no.
So all of this comes out in the -- in the media. And she sort of goes -- she gets fired from the New York magazine because of this journalistic lapse. And she sort of goes into hiding.
Okay? She goes into hiding. She moves. She is -- not saying word one about this. And, you know, she talks a lot.
So that's notable.
In this period, Ryan Lizza, her ex-fiancé now, they broke up. Ex-fiancé and her are -- are negotiating according to him, a do not -- what is it?
A non-disclosure. Don't talk about this. Don't talk about this. Don't disparage. Let's just let this be over.
He also gets a message, according to him, from an intermediate friend that says, "Hey. She never wants to talk about this again. She hopes you'll never talk about this again. Can we just move past this?" And he according to him says, "You know what, I'm on board with that. Let's just never let this go."
So a little bit of time goes on. What we learn is, her time in exile has actually been spent writing a book, which is called American Canto. It's coming out in a couple of weeks from today, or from yesterday.
Two weeks from yesterday.
And it's a book --
GLENN: Is this one -- does the book include her time with governor Mark Sanford?
STU: Well, we're getting to that.
GLENN: 2019, 2020.
I mean, was she sleeping with him, too, before the JFK thing.
STU: That's a big part of the story we're getting to. At this point in the story, we have no idea about that. We only know about the RFK Jr. thing. So she releases this book, and in it, is all these details about the RFK Jr thing.
Now, you would think the way the media would handle this woman who they've just ejected from their society for massive journalistic and immoral lapses would be hammering her over her activity here.
GLENN: No.
STU: Instead, she gets a glowing profile in the New York Times with, like, her -- with an incredible -- you have to seat footage, Glenn. You would love it. It's her, she's driving in a convertible. Hair in the wind. Like, Chanel glasses. She looks spectacular, as she's going down. This is how the New York Times rolls this out for her.
